Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Do you think our technology will match that of the UNSC in 500 years?
  • Subject: Do you think our technology will match that of the UNSC in 500 years?
Subject: Do you think our technology will match that of the UNSC in 500 years?

I am a monument to all your sins

we'd probably be a little more advanced than them, assuming FTL is possible, if not than we would probably only have a mars and lunar colony, maybe a few on Saturn's rings.

  • 04.16.2011 4:33 PM PDT

"Peace, gentlemen...
Peace is the ultimate goal of the Traxus Project.
Peace not in our time but in the future.
Future generations will benefit from the work begun here today.
Gentlemen, I give you the Traxus Project"


Posted by: hotshot revan II

Colonisation is the first priority,look at now,we can't even feed millions of Humans here,meanwhile oil is running out and idiot governements focus on warfare instead of clean energy.
I'm looking at you USA.



Good grief...
A good start for any sort of progress though, would be for people to be a lot less blatantly inflammatory toward each other....-_-

[Edited on 04.16.2011 4:50 PM PDT]

  • 04.16.2011 4:46 PM PDT

So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us...


Posted by: Darthbill99
we'd probably be a little more advanced than them, assuming FTL is possible, if not than we would probably only have a mars and lunar colony, maybe a few on Saturn's rings.


No, not now, not ever. You can't break the laws of physics. Mass dilation... Google it.

  • 04.16.2011 4:47 PM PDT

DMH-Always Loaded
My name is Tyler. Computers and Video games is what I love to do.

A lot can happen in 500 years. I think we will be similar, but not necessarily colonizing on different planets.

  • 04.16.2011 5:16 PM PDT

"Find where the liar hides, so that I may place my boot between his gums!" - Rtas 'Vadum

Posted by: Count Rolland
People are pretty much just too *blam* arrogant and stubborn to see any light of reason or truth beyond the reach of their own egos.

...but it is nice to have d.r.e.a.m.s..isn't it?

I would put it down to hope and consequence of a belief rather than ego...

  • 04.16.2011 5:25 PM PDT

Bacon for all !!!!!!!!!!!111111111111

we will have to definitely leave earth in the next 2 centuries because of overpopulation and lack of resources.

  • 04.16.2011 6:42 PM PDT

Vengeance only leads to an ongoing cycle of hatred.


Posted by: manwith
I would not be surprised if we did not live outside of our solar system in 500 years.

Me either, but I think it's bound to happen.

  • 04.16.2011 6:48 PM PDT

That's a really good question, man. I think we'll be ahead. NASA says that they think it'll be possible to build earth's first Orbital Elevator in about 50 years, and with the advances we're making in weaponry, we'll be ahead of the UNSC no doubt. We pretty much already have MAC cannons. I mean the new rail guns we're working on can hit targets up to like 100 miles away or something.

The only thing I'm not sure of would be space travel. The only way we can be up to par with the UNSC is if we discover something like Slipspace or Hyperdrive or some such.

[Edited on 04.16.2011 7:18 PM PDT]

  • 04.16.2011 7:16 PM PDT

"Peace, gentlemen...
Peace is the ultimate goal of the Traxus Project.
Peace not in our time but in the future.
Future generations will benefit from the work begun here today.
Gentlemen, I give you the Traxus Project"


Posted by: anton1792
I would put it down to hope and consequence of a belief rather than ego...


Hm? Beliefs....?

Clarify? 0.o

  • 04.16.2011 8:24 PM PDT

I believe our technology, such as vehicles and weapons, will be far superior than to anything Halo has right now. Our current technologies are advancing extremely quickly and I don't think it would be too far of a stretch to say we may have readily available space transport, though I doubt it will be anything like Slip-Space.

  • 04.16.2011 10:09 PM PDT

I'm a hybrid....

As for weaponsand vehicles, much better. As for space traval, not even close.

  • 04.17.2011 12:22 AM PDT

maybe the war will come, but when somthing ends then somthing better starts... i think it will be only for good if our race vill die out(only 254,754 vill be left), then the next genaration will learn form our mistakes...

  • 04.17.2011 3:29 AM PDT

Weapons, aircraft, vehicles will all be better but we probably won't have spaceships similar and we certainly won't have slipspace drives.

  • 04.17.2011 3:39 AM PDT

I think that in 500 years time, our technology will be similar, if not slightly above. We will have slipspace technology, smart AI. Although at this time its hard to imagine what other technologies we might have then. Things we would never imagine possible in this day and age. This is 500 years were talking about, think how far we've come in the past 500 years.

[Edited on 04.17.2011 4:04 AM PDT]

  • 04.17.2011 3:59 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Be nice to noobs..Remember even MLG players were noobs at one point.

Posted by: Dr Ninja

Posted by: Darthbill99
we'd probably be a little more advanced than them, assuming FTL is possible, if not than we would probably only have a mars and lunar colony, maybe a few on Saturn's rings.


No, not now, not ever. You can't break the laws of physics. Mass dilation... Google it.


In special relativity, an object that has a mass cannot travel at the speed of light. As the object approaches the speed of light, the object's energy and momentum increase without bound.
In the first years after 1905, following Lorentz and Einstein, the terms longitudinal and transverse mass were still in use."

Correct me if I am wrong but I do believe that this leads back to "The THEORY of Relativity." Man has been wrong and often times is wrong. Don't pull that scientific method and scientific law -blam!- here...it is simply as stated a theory...Theory is defined as-a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.

Hell that theory is a derivative of math correct? Math has changed alot since even I was a kid. Mathematics was created by man and is hence forth invalid and flawed.

  • 04.17.2011 5:30 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"YOU,YOU,AND YOU...PANIC. THE REST OF YOU, COME WITH ME"

To all the people who claim energy consumption as a reason to dismiss advancing technology or that we will all murder each other when the oil runs out.

Have none of you heard of nuclear fusion? The fusing together of elements at the sub-atomic level? The process that happens at the very core of the Sun? The main reason why we are alive right now?

It is not viable at the moment, true, but we have been succesful at fusing together isotopes of Hydrogen. The problem is that we get less energy out than it takes to raise the temperatures to the extremes that is needed for fusion to occur. However, there have been recent developments using LASERs to raise the temperature that look possible. It is very likely that within fifty years we will viable nucler fusion plants.

Of course the problem with this is the world's governments and the ignorant's fears of nuclear energy. Either way, if an intelligent leader makes use of nuclear fusion when it is fully viable there will be no energy fears again, especially considering that Hydrogen (the reactors fuel) is the msot abundant element in the universe.

  • 04.17.2011 5:50 AM PDT

@JosephBiwald
View my Art

Per Audacia Ad Astra

If you look at how far we've come though the last past 10 years, yes. As long are children are educated, I think we can go beyond the UNSC in 500 years.

  • 04.17.2011 6:10 AM PDT

"Find where the liar hides, so that I may place my boot between his gums!" - Rtas 'Vadum

Posted by: Count Rolland
Posted by: anton1792
I would put it down to hope and consequence of a belief rather than ego...


Hm? Beliefs....?

Clarify? 0.o

Consequence of a belief.

Basically saying something like "Well FTL must be possible because we are in trouble if it is not. We will not be able to colonise interstellar without it." The refusal to back down on things like FTL is because they have favourable outcomes; favourable consequences. Conversely, there are negative consequences if these things are not possible, thus why people are adamant to believe in them.

  • 04.17.2011 6:51 AM PDT
  • gamertag: sum0ne
  • user homepage:

Thanks for Team Snipers Bungie.
Mythic Member, Legendary Member and back and forth. i just can't make up my mind!
Campaign - Halo C.E.>Halo 2>Halo 3
Multiplayer - Halo 2>Halo 3>Halo C.E.
Just about every thing I post is my opinion and nothing more. Be subjective. Respect other's opinions. Try to understand other's point of view.


Posted by: anton1792
Posted by: Count Rolland
Posted by: anton1792
I would put it down to hope and consequence of a belief rather than ego...


Hm? Beliefs....?

Clarify? 0.o

Consequence of a belief.

Basically saying something like "Well FTL must be possible because we are in trouble if it is not. We will not be able to colonise interstellar without it." The refusal to back down on things like FTL is because they have favourable outcomes; favourable consequences. Conversely, there are negative consequences if these things are not possible, thus why people are adamant to believe in them.
So true. Also the younger you are the more you want to believe that anything is possible. That through hard work and determination any person can achieve any thing. While hope is as important as any thing else the reality is this is simply not true.

  • 04.17.2011 7:18 AM PDT

reality and hope will always be at war in our minds
(we all have unrealistic dreams and hope that they will come true but the fact that we live in reality messes it up by AnubissWorior)

  • 04.17.2011 7:22 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Nate Cleaves


Posted by: Dr Ninja

Posted by: Darthbill99
we'd probably be a little more advanced than them, assuming FTL is possible, if not than we would probably only have a mars and lunar colony, maybe a few on Saturn's rings.


No, not now, not ever. You can't break the laws of physics. Mass dilation... Google it.

That only works for things with mass, empty space has no mass. Ever hear of inflation, space pushing things away at speeds faster that light? I think we will definentily be able to artifitially create inflation to go faster that light. It obeys the laws of phisics (unfortunantially)

  • 04.18.2011 6:44 AM PDT
  • gamertag: tsassi
  • user homepage:

First of all I would like to say that there is more pessimism in this thread than I expected. I am a pessimist too but nuclear war? Really? Even humans aren't too stupid to make their own planet completely uninhabitable.

My opinion on this subject is we could either be way above UNSC tech or below. If we continue using all our efforts building better weapons our technological advancement will slow down as we will just be fighting for fuel and food. If we achieve some kind of stable stage instead, we have lots of possibilities and may even go above UNSC.

UNSC uses fusion. It's very hard to produce and hasn't been very efficient this far. Why not antimatter? Only problems with it are actually production and containment. If we solve those we can transfer 100% of energy to another form. There sure are no effiency problems.

FTL travel is something many people don't believe. Why? Of course I am not talking about direct traveling in completely normal space but about stretching laws of physics a bit. For me existence of slipspace sounds as possible or even normal as mass-energy equivalence. If you say that slipspace can't exist why don't you say the mass of an object isn't dependent on it's speed? Only difference between those two in terms of possibility is that we don't have an equation for other. You probably quess which.

After we have these two which actually fit very well together as it's not a miracle that FTL travel probably would require a lot of energy we only have the "easy" part left. Look for inhabitable planets. We haven't even got further than moon but have already found planets that have a chance of being inhabitable.

Of course that all won't be as easy as it seems. We still have many wars to come. It's not like every country would just peacefully share all the inhabitable planets. There are still lots of wars to come. Some will probably be in space.

After you have read that you won't porbably believe me but believe or not, I am a realist. I just happen to know what universe and even humans are capable of.

  • 04.18.2011 7:58 AM PDT

The NAVY already has a MAC cannon, and the covenant is using superheated plasma but our Free electron lasers are more powerful then Plasma so in 500 years we should be comparable to the foreunners.

FTL is possible, just because you can't run as fast as a baseball doesn't mean you can't go faster then one in a jet.

[Edited on 04.18.2011 10:15 AM PDT]

  • 04.18.2011 10:13 AM PDT
  • gamertag: sum0ne
  • user homepage:

Thanks for Team Snipers Bungie.
Mythic Member, Legendary Member and back and forth. i just can't make up my mind!
Campaign - Halo C.E.>Halo 2>Halo 3
Multiplayer - Halo 2>Halo 3>Halo C.E.
Just about every thing I post is my opinion and nothing more. Be subjective. Respect other's opinions. Try to understand other's point of view.


Posted by: tsassi2
First of all I would like to say that there is more pessimism in this thread than I expected. I am a pessimist too but nuclear war? Really? Even humans aren't too stupid to make their own planet completely uninhabitable.
Seriously. Do a little reading. The things we humans will do in the name of religion, revenge and greed is nothing less than insane.

I'm not trying to be mean by the way. When you start talking about people, governments and societies willing to commit genocide they are usually also willing to destroy every thing before giving up.

  • 04.18.2011 10:31 AM PDT
  • gamertag: tsassi
  • user homepage:


Posted by: notnooborelite

Posted by: tsassi2
First of all I would like to say that there is more pessimism in this thread than I expected. I am a pessimist too but nuclear war? Really? Even humans aren't too stupid to make their own planet completely uninhabitable.
Seriously. Do a little reading. The things we humans will do in the name of religion, revenge and greed is nothing less than insane.

I'm not trying to be mean by the way. When you start talking about people, governments and societies willing to commit genocide they are usually also willing to destroy every thing before giving up.

I have done enough reading. I was saying that governments are too scared to use nuclear weapons. Why didn't cold war never come to nuclear war? Because, both USA and Soviet Union knew that if they launched a misslie the enemy would launch even more missilesat them.

Humans may be stupid and selfish but there is one thing most of them care about, their own life. Unless someone who has totally gone insane launches a nuclear missile there will be no nuclear war.

If we imagine that for some reason that kind of war started, it wouldn't last long and it wouldn't destroy all humanity. There are places way too far away to be even affected by nuclear bombs. Biggest nuclear bomb ever detonated was Tsar Bomba. It was 50 megatons and the explosion radius was "only" about 20 miles. Of course the fallout area would be somewhat larger but still places like Australia would pretty much be left alone. Same would be with northern Canada and most of Africa too. There would still be lots of people left. We just can't commit self extinction.

I know you aren't being mean. I like arguments as long as their good.

  • 04.18.2011 11:01 AM PDT